When Philosphy and Literature Collide in Law

The joy of practicing law, as opposed to medicine (an activity I know nothing about, thus I can freely mischaracterize) is that your colleagues are avid readers and closet philosophers.  When the opposing counsel or the judge comes out of the closet, there is the potential for enlightenment... or, if you are in the courtroom, disaster.  A modern jury argument that relies on Henry V quotes to frame the issue of conspiracy or, worse yet, breach of contract, is as doomed as the French at Agincourt.

"Monkey and the Cat"

"Consideration, like an angel, came
And whipped the offending Adam out of him."
Henry V, Shakespeare

When not in the courtroom, literature and philosophy can be the best tools for efficiently framing complex issues.  For example, Judge Richard Cuhad's Westpoint education came through clearly when he wrote, "This case concerns the corrupt, Machiavellian world of permit parking at the University of Illinois's Urbana-Champaign campus." Brewer v. Board of Education, 479 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2007).  The late Judge Terence Evans responded in kind, showing off his liberal arts education from Marquette.  In, Staub v. Proctor Hospital, Judge Evans began the opinion by explaining the "cat's paw theory," adopted by Judge Cuhad in Brewer, derives its meaning from a 17th Century poem by Jean de La Fontaine (1621-1695).  The playful wit of Judge Evans deserves its own entry at the Edge.  (see discussion of "Ho" and "Hoe" in Bancard America, Inc. v. Universal Bankcard Sys.,Inc.,203 F.3d 477 (7th Cir. 2000))

But, while we are visiting the 7th Circuit, we cannot overlook Judge Richard Posner. Sticking with the classics, the English major from Yale succinctly explained that if the people of Athens could vote to execute Socrates, then people of Chicago can vote to withdraw the liquor license of Club Misty. (Club Misty, Inc. v. Laski, 208 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2000)).  They both had an opportunity to argue their case to those casting votes.